Derrick Adam Floyd v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 227th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-02-00904-CR
Derrick Adam FLOYD,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2002-CR-0611
Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 5, 2003

AFFIRMED

Derrick Floyd was charged with the offense of robbery. Floyd pleaded no contest to the alleged offense, and the trial court sentenced him to 10 years imprisonment and fined him $1000. Floyd's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Counsel concludes that the appeal is without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to Floyd, who was advised of his right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. Floyd filed a pro se brief.

In his pro se brief, Floyd contends his plea was conditioned upon him being given "a fair opportunity to receive probation." He argues he was not given a fair opportunity to receive probation because the court sentenced him without the benefit of a written pre-sentence investigation report. Thus, because the court did not comply with the terms of his plea agreement, Floyd believes he is entitled to a reversal of his conviction. We disagree.

A review of the record from Floyd's sentencing hearing reveals that the trial court did in fact have the benefit of a written pre-sentence investigation report when it sentenced Floyd.

The Court: Mr. Floyd, you are here because on October 2nd of 2002 you entered a plea of no contest in this case, along with a plea of true to the repeater allegation. I reset the case then for a pre-sentence investigation to be done, which has now been completed.

Any objections to the PSI? Any objections to the PSI?

Defense Counsel: No, your honor

Because the trial court had the benefit of a written pre-sentence investigation report when it sentenced Floyd, we hold Floyd's argument lacks merit. Accordingly, we overrule Floyd's sole appellate issue.

Based on the foregoing, we agree with Floyd's attorney that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant counsel's motion

to withdraw. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n. 1 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

Catherine Stone, Justice

Do Not Publish